[Zlib-devel] zlib-1.2.5 DLL build

[Vincent Torri]

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, Gilles Vollant wrote:

> some probably include C standard library as static, other uses DLL
>
> VC++ 6.0 code is slow compared to VS2010 with all optimisation (including
> profile optilisation=
> I prefer a bigger DLL which is faster

Well, that depends on the purpose of the use of the lib. On embedded 
devices, maybe a smaller lib is better for some people. That's also why I 
asked the compilation flags used to built the DLL.

My POV is, even on embedded, i prefer speed, hence bigger size.

Vincent Torri

>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : zlib-devel-bounces at madler.net [mailto:zlib-devel-bounces at madler.net] De
> la part de Jan Nijtmans
> Envoyé : lundi 12 juillet 2010 12:42
> À : zlib-devel at madler.net
> Objet : Re: [Zlib-devel] zlib-1.2.5 DLL build
>
> 2010/7/12 Cosmin Truta <cosmin at cs.toronto.edu>:
>> Please have a look (and perhaps run some tests), and let's publish it
>> on the zlib site if everything looks well to you.
>
> Didn't do any tests yet, but just noticing that the sizes of zdll.lib
> and zlib1.dll
> differ quite a lot compared with the previous version (1.2.4):
>
>                 1.2.4               1.2.5
> zdll.lib        13438             38996
> zlib1.dll       77876           101376
>
> So, before making such a step, I would like to hear at least an
> explanation for this size difference. How does VC++ 6.0 do here?
>
> Regards,
>          Jan Nijtmans
>
> _______________________________________________
> Zlib-devel mailing list
> Zlib-devel at madler.net
> http://mail.madler.net/mailman/listinfo/zlib-devel_madler.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Zlib-devel mailing list
> Zlib-devel at madler.net
> http://mail.madler.net/mailman/listinfo/zlib-devel_madler.net
>
>